4 ms·
My sense is the opposite. Billions of people use Facebook & X because hosting their own website is too hard. It’s very likely millions of people would love a si
by mch82 3y ago
My sense is the opposite. Billions of people use Facebook & X because hosting their own website is too hard. It’s very likely millions of people would love a simple way to host a website from their phone.
- nroets 3y agoI registered a domain, paid for word press hosting, learned the set up and started writing my travel journal there. The photos display in full HD without ads. But most family and friends forget to visit it, because Facebook is not promoting my website.
- 7373737373 3y agoThe cost and complexity of the process you describe is beyond the complexity that people, who want to express themselves in small ways, incrementally, over time, are willing or able to engage with, especially up-front
- OfSanguineFire 3y agoMillions of people won’t want to host a website from their phone, simply because millions of people are no longer used to navigating to obscure third-party websites. They don’t do it themselves much, and they don’t expect their peers to do it. The internet activity of younger generations today is increasingly centered around use of only a handful of websites, mostly provided through dedicated phone apps. Unless a person’s own website gets promoted by a social-media site’s algorithm, or comes up at the top of a Google search, no one is going to visit that URL.
- ufmace 3y agoI don't think so. What people want is a way to create some words, audio, pictures, video, etc and let people see it. The vast majority of people don't care at all about exactly what technological choices are used to make that happen. For a variety of reasons, services that are at least semi-centralized and running on proper servers in datacenters are vastly more effective at this than trying to run a web server on a mobile device being used in its intended role.